ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jose Alberto Fernandez" <>
Subject RE: Request: Change <javac> debug default to "on"
Date Wed, 06 Nov 2002 11:35:18 GMT
There is another alternative, not the most wonderful
but it may simplify any changes to buildfiles:

Add a new magic property: build.compiler.debugofflevel
which when set will be used instead of ":none" when debug not specified or
defined as false. 

This would allow people to just set this property and get the correct behabiour
the value can always be overriden by debuglevel attribute.

Of course the name for the property is just an idea.

Jose Alberto

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephane Bailliez []
Sent: 05 November 2002 21:49
To: Ant Developers List
Subject: Re: Request: Change <javac> debug default to "on"

----- Original Message -----
From: "Magesh Umasankar" <>

> A change to the existing behavior of <javac> practically
> means a rewrite of *every* ant build file out there.

> By making this change, we are forcing every build file
> to be rewritten to retain existing, and in most cases,
> accepted behavior, when an ant upgrade is made.

In essence I agree. In essence I do not.

It should not be underestimated how we could inadvertantly help people
shooting themselves in the foot with debug=false and includeantruntime=true.
I believe indeed that once the whole planet will be used to this invisible
behavior we will have a hard time taking it out. Another 'referer' for

Maybe this should be added as a warning note in <javac> doc but then again
people using it for years will not bother looking at the docs. Might help
newcomers though if it is never fixed, we'd better push for 'correct'
ways...thoughts ?

I think that even though this bug does not manifest itself in a crash, it
might not be a reason not to consider it as indeed there is history.. I
think this a purely a psychological problem from the 'if it ain't broken
don't fix it' paradigm and that we like better to fix things when it
crashes, even though I have seen people coding against bugs...meaning that
any fix in the API would cause a breakage in the user code...we can go a
long way like this. That means we must stop fix bugs ;o)

The includeantruntime is WAY more problematic to me. Users are addicted to
it. It will create definite trauma. It will be just like removing social
security in France. :)

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message